Re: Logical file order of records -- MIDRANGE-L

Subject: Re: Logical file order of records
From: CRPence <CRPbottle@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 05 Nov 2009 18:51:53 -0800
List-archive: <http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l>
List-help: <mailto:midrange-l-request@midrange.com?subject=help>
List-id: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion <midrange-l.midrange.com>
List-post: <mailto:midrange-l@midrange.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l>, <mailto:midrange-l-request@midrange.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l>, <mailto:midrange-l-request@midrange.com?subject=unsubscribe>

FWiW the original scenario was non-keyed PFA with only the keyed LFA, and an /exact/ /copy/ of this DBFile network in a separate library. So what was proposed by the OP, save *with access paths* and a restore verified to have restored *with that access path* intact would have the DB files and access paths the closest possible to identical.

Regards, Chuck

Evan Harris wrote:

Re: Save and restore being identical - not necessarily true.
Search on "implicitly shared access paths".

Alan Campin wrote:

The trick is that this can be modified if you have reuse deleted
records turned on. In that case, the result would be random.

As far as the order in another library would depend on how it got
copied. A save and restore should be identical.

As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2025 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].

Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.